Bernie Sanders called for all rape accusations on college campuses to be handled through law enforcement, a controversial stance that puts him at odds with many advocates.

Decrying rape and sexual assault on campuses as an “epidemic,” he said schools must not try to handle the issue internally.

ADVERTISEMENT

“Rape and assault is rape or assault whether it takes place on a campus or a dark street,” he said Monday at the Black and Brown Presidential Forum in Iowa.

“If a student rapes another student it has got to be understood as a very serious crime, it has to get outside of the school and have a police investigation and that has to take place.”

Sanders is still a white knight mangina for saying that rape on college campuses is an epidemic when statistics show otherwise. However, there is another interesting angle to this. Sanders is Jewish. We keep hearing from white knight nationalists (like Angelo John Gage who took his videos down) and conspiracy theorists that the Jews are behind feminism. If the Jews were behind feminism, then Sanders would never have said that the criminal justice system should handle rape cases and not college tribunals like the feminists want. If the Jews were behind feminism, then whatever Sanders would have said on the subject would be the same as what feminists currently think. Since there is a difference, then Jews aren’t in charge of feminism in any way whatsoever.

Sanders will do one of two things now that he is being attacked by feminists for saying that rape should be handled by the criminal justice system.

Stand firm on what he said in the face of relentless feminist attacks on him.

Fold like a cheap suit and give in to feminist demands (similar to how he responded to attacks from #BlackLivesMatter)

While I expect Sanders to do the latter, in either case it will prove, again, that the Jews aren’t behind feminism. If Sanders stands firm on what he said, then it proves that feminists will not do what Jews want. If Sanders folds, then it shows that Jews are giving in to what feminists demand and not the other way around. That would show that feminists can force Jews to do what they want so the Jews can’t be in control of feminism in any way whatsoever.

The lack of due process in universities, will get implemented in all states all over america, just like the jews want

Theres already no due process for men in child support, family courts, divorce law, DV & rape laws.

The lack of due process in universities, doesnt change anything, there is no due process for men in society as a whole, which is why 92% of all workplace deaths are men, then theres the massive suicide rates …

Theres also the fact 70% of all men work full time, while only 30% of women work full time.

Explaining why women live longer then men.

The problem is men are living in a Jewish Marxist Utopia, where they have no due process, while society rots around them thanks to the propoganda tools of the male hating christians & catholics, who work hand in hand with their chosen people, the jews.

The problem here is you have no idea who’s behind the leftists, sjws or the feminists, you thinks its all a coincidence, that it all happens naturally & factions with trillions of dollars, would never try to socially engineer society.

If whiteknight nationalists think that Jews, who they outnumber 40 to 1, are so powerful and clever, then that is a stunning admission that WNs think that whites are not very smart by being so easily controlled.

Funny how WNs have such a low opinion of whites – they think all whites are as inept as WNs are.

The notion that FI would not exist if not for Jews is crazy. The FI is rampant in Japan, Korea, etc. all the same, as it is a central part of the human psyche.

Feminism was evident in societies as disparate as ancient Rome and 19th century America. Jews certainly didn’t have much influence in either society. The common denominator appears to be a surplus of wealth and free time, plus reduced personal risk. Once that occurs, women will try to get as much as possible transferred to them. It’s instinctive behavior, honed over millennia.

But in wealthy societies it’s obsolete. All it does now is create huge misallocations of resources and dissolve the glue that holds civilization together.

The FI is rampant in Japan, Korea, etc. all the same, as it is a central part of the human psyche.

Yes, it’s everywhere. But in some societies it’s much more tolerable than others (on the level the human male evolved to comfortably deal with).

“Feminism was evident in societies as disparate as ancient Rome and 19th century America. Jews certainly didn’t have much influence in either society. The common denominator appears to be a surplus of wealth and free time, plus reduced personal risk. Once that occurs, women will try to get as much as possible transferred to them”.

Well said. This is the biggest problem I have with tradcons, nationalists and such. Even people that otherwise understand the nature of women insist on wishing for “things to return to the way they are”, not recognizing that’s merely part of the cycle.

“It’s instinctive behavior, honed over millennia”

Which is exactly why this cycle will continue unless something is changed. I fear that this will somehow entail a transformation of base human nature however since this tendency to cater to women does indeed seem to be deeply ingrained. Frankly, I’m not sure what’s to be done about it or if anything can be done about it and its simply a cycle that humans are doomed to repeat in societies that gain technology and wealth. The ‘alternative’ seems to be third world countries where industrialization never seems to take hold (For example Africa) and those countries have their own laundry list of problems.

“If whiteknight nationalists think that Jews, who they outnumber 40 to 1, are so powerful and clever, then that is a stunning admission that WNs think that whites are not very smart by being so easily controlled.

Funny how WNs have such a low opinion of whites – they think all whites are as inept as WNs are”.

The opinions of WNs and BNs also comes with the implicit admission that apparently whites/black cannot keep their women under control OR that men exist merely to serve their women at the expense of all else.

Either way, the end result doesn’t bold well for a group of people claiming to be above and beyond all others.

I will try explaining, but as a white knight nationalist I don’t expect you to have the intelligence to understand it.

Feminists have decided that rape cases should be handled outside of the criminal justice system when possible. If the Jews were behind feminism, then every (prominent) Jew would express the same position on how rape cases should be handled. Bernie Sanders is a prominent Jew. Therefore if the Jews were behind feminism, Sanders would support the idea that rape cases should be handled outside of the criminal justice system. Instead Sanders opposes the idea that rape cases should be handled outside of the criminal justice system. This proves that the Jews can’t be behind feminism since there is no way a Jewish senator would not be part of the Great Jewish Conspiracy (TM). Thus a single example of a prominent Jew disagreeing with a feminist position is enough to prove there is a difference of opinion between Jews and feminists. Therefore there are only two options why this happened:

1. There is a Great Jewish Conspiracy (TM) out there, but it doesn’t control feminism because feminists are disobeying the Jews.
2. There is no Great Jewish Conspiracy (TM) which means that the Jews aren’t behind feminism.

[…] Sanders will do it at 85 MPH. (That’s because Sanders is against a bit of feminism like rape cases being tried by colleges.) Sanders won’t save young women. At most, he will delay the world of hurt young women […]

Human behaviour on the web is something I find fascinating. The way that people project their own inadequacies.

You begin your response with an insult, which is predicated on the notion that because I express a certain view that is not in sync with yours, and because I disagree with the conclusory assertions in one of your blog posts, that must mean I follow a particular philosophy (white nationalism) in a particular way (‘white knight’, whatever that means).

The phrase, ‘white knight nationalist’ is a dumbed-down American formulation used by people who spend too much time on the internet and don’t appreciate how, in the real world, most people have nuanced and complex views about things, because the real world is nuanced and complex.

By insulting me, without any basis or foundation, you have needlessly alienated myself, a reader of your blog. I’ve been reading your blog now for a very long time, and I normally enjoy your posts. I was not even criticising you, nor was I here expressing a view about Jews one way or the other.

[quote]”Feminists have decided that rape cases should be handled outside of the criminal justice system when possible.”[unquote]

Actually, I don’t entirely agree with you here, but I don’t see this as the contentious part of what you say, so for present purposes, I am happy to treat this is true. However, the rest of what you say doesn’t follow from it. For one thing, feminists are not a monolithic bloc, though it might seem that way, and for another, a man or woman can disagree that rape and other sexual cases should be handled this way and still be a feminist. Sanders’ statement in disagreeing with other feminists was still an affirmation of feminism. Feminism is evidently not a party line.

You go on:

[quote]”If the Jews were behind feminism, then every (prominent) Jew would express the same position on how rape cases should be handled. Bernie Sanders is a prominent Jew. Therefore if the Jews were behind feminism, Sanders would support the idea that rape cases should be handled outside of the criminal justice system.”[unquote]

What we have here is a logical fallacy. Just because every prominent Jew does not express the exact same view on a particular problem, it doesn’t follow that Jews have not been influential in the political movement that has arguably led to that problem.

The reality is that Bernie Sanders is a feminist. The statement on which you have based your false and fallacious conclusions was a feminist statement. At the time he made the statement, he was (and still is) a political candidate looking for votes in a primary election. He expresses a particular view that seems slightly more favourable to men but is still feminist. That hardly qualifies as proof that organised Jewry has not been influential with feminism.

So your piece tells us nothing, except that one particular male Jewish feminist on one particular day expressed a view that was slightly less radically feminist than lots of other feminists. So what? Going on that, we wouldn’t know whether Jews have been influential in feminism or not, and for present purposes, I take no view one way or the other.

You then say:

[quote]”This proves that the Jews can’t be behind feminism since there is no way a Jewish senator would not be part of the Great Jewish Conspiracy (TM). Thus a single example of a prominent Jew disagreeing with a feminist position is enough to prove there is a difference of opinion between Jews and feminists.”[unquote]

No, it’s not enough to prove that. On its own, one statement from one person proves nothing.

You conclude by giving us two selective options, based on your own loaded opinion about things:

[quoted]”1. There is a Great Jewish Conspiracy (TM) out there, but it doesn’t control feminism because feminists are disobeying the Jews.

“2. There is no Great Jewish Conspiracy (TM) which means that the Jews aren’t behind feminism.”[unquote]

My point is that your piece doesn’t help us with either of these options. Either could be true. Or neither.

I’ve been reading your blog now for a very long time, and I normally enjoy your posts.

You say you have been reading my blog for a very long time, yet you don’t know what “white knight” means? Sorry, troll, I’m not going to bite, although I like how you managed to work in your own version of NAFALT in there.